PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft Shefter: The 1st pick is worth ...


Mr. Laz
12-21-2011, 01:15 PM
3 first round picks and two 2nd round picks ... maybe four 1st round picks.

He was talking about how the Rams might just end up with the 1st pick because they play the 49ers and Steelers but the Colts play the jags and texans.

first pick tie would be decided by SOS

his opinion anyway

arrowheadnation
12-21-2011, 01:18 PM
No way. I figured maybe two first rounders and two second rounders, or 3 first rounders. Wow...As much as I'd love to have Luck, I wouldn't give that much up for him. RG3 for 2 first rounders or a first and 2 seconds would be a better get.

htismaqe
12-21-2011, 01:18 PM
Can you imagine if the Colts fuck around and miss their shot at Andrew Luck?

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 01:19 PM
I would seriously laugh if the Colts lost out on the #1 pick.

But seriously though....the Colts could easily trade with the Rams and swap the #1 and #2 pick.....and it wouldn't cost near that much to do.

the Talking Can
12-21-2011, 01:21 PM
if Colts are 2nd, and you know they are taking Luck, then I could see a crazy deal go down with Miami or Washington

Chiefnj2
12-21-2011, 01:22 PM
I would seriously laugh if the Colts lost out on the #1 pick.

But seriously though....the Colts could easily trade with the Rams and swap the #1 and #2 pick.....and it wouldn't cost near that much to do.

Why swap and get not much of anything from the Colts when you can get 3 first rounders plus from someone else?

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 01:22 PM
if Colts are 2nd, and you know they are taking Luck, then I could see a crazy deal go down with Miami or Washington

Washington probably more than Miami. Daniel Snyder would give up 4 years worth of draft picks to get Luck.

scho63
12-21-2011, 01:23 PM
3 first round picks and two 2nd round picks ... maybe four 1st round picks.

He was talking about how the Rams might just end up with the 1st pick because they play the 49ers and Steelers but the Colts play the jags and texans.

first pick tie would be decided by SOS

his opinion anyway

NO WAY-that would be organizational suicide for the franchise.

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 01:23 PM
Why swap and get not much of anything from the Colts when you can get 3 first rounders plus from someone else?

That's if someone is willing to pay that much.

whoman69
12-21-2011, 01:23 PM
Can you imagine if the Colts **** around and miss their shot at Andrew Luck?

That almost brought a tear to my eye. I think a kitten drowns every time someone thinks about that possibility.

whoman69
12-21-2011, 01:24 PM
I wouldn't go Ricky Williams for anyone. Its been shown that it doesn't work to give up the future for one player.

the Talking Can
12-21-2011, 01:24 PM
i think it would more likely be 2 firsts and then a bunch of other picks...multiple 2's and 3's...

giving up 3 firsts is tough to imagine

-King-
12-21-2011, 01:26 PM
Fuck it. If the offer is on the table, especially from a team drafting in the top 10 already, Colts would be stupid not to take it. They can get all those picks and Barkley or RGIII
Posted via Mobile Device

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:26 PM
Damn. Fuck yes.

I want the fucking first bad.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:27 PM
Can you imagine if the Colts **** around and miss their shot at Andrew Luck?

I'd fucking celebrate.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:27 PM
3 first round picks and two 2nd round picks ... maybe four 1st round picks.

He was talking about how the Rams might just end up with the 1st pick because they play the 49ers and Steelers but the Colts play the jags and texans.

first pick tie would be decided by SOS

his opinion anyway

Also, don't forget Minnesota.

DaKCMan AP
12-21-2011, 01:29 PM
1. That's not what the 1st pick is 'worth'
2. They're just anchoring. It's the first asking price in what would be a negotiation.
3. If they insist on a ransom then just call their bluff and see if they take Luck with Bradford on the roster and many other holes.

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 01:30 PM
Fuck it. If the offer is on the table, especially from a team drafting in the top 10 already, Colts would be stupid not to take it. They can get all those picks and Barkley or RGIII
Posted via Mobile Device

And then watch other teams trade above them to take Barkley and RGIII.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 01:31 PM
1. That's not what the 1st pick is 'worth'
2. They're just anchoring. It's the first asking price in what would be a negotiation.
3. If they insist on a ransom then just call their bluff and see if they take Luck with Bradford on the roster and many other holes.

If the Rams picked first and no one offered them a good deal for the pick why wouldn't they pick Luck? They could still trade him, or they could trade Bradford.

KCrockaholic
12-21-2011, 01:31 PM
The first pick isn't "worth" that amount. They aren't even taking into account where the trading partner's 1st round pick in 2012 will be. There's a big difference between a Minnesota Vikings 1st and a 49ers 1st.

DaKCMan AP
12-21-2011, 01:33 PM
If the Rams picked first and no one offered them a good deal for the pick why wouldn't they pick Luck? They could still trade him, or they could trade Bradford.

Or they could be stuck with 2 QBs and not upgrading their otherwise awful roster. Once they draft Luck either his or Bradford's (or both) trade value decreases. The 1st pick is worth more prior to the selection.

Rain Man
12-21-2011, 01:34 PM
Does Shefter think that Shanahan and Pioli would trade up?

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:34 PM
If the Rams picked first and no one offered them a good deal for the pick why wouldn't they pick Luck? They could still trade him, or they could trade Bradford.

Which wouldn't make any fucking sense when they need a playmaker, and improvements on the OL.

Chiefaholic
12-21-2011, 01:35 PM
I'd trade a couple first and two second rounders in a heartbeat for an opportunity to have Luck lead this franchise for the next 10-15 years. A lot of people outside the hardcore fans think the Chiefs are multiple pieces away from a Superbowl caliber team. A healthy Charles, Berry, and Moeaki combined with a QB the caliber of Luck could carry this franchise for years to come.

There are multiple prospects in this years draft, but the only guaranteed QB to succeed is Luck, IMO. I'de much rather take a guaranteed option with Luck this year, rather than chance it on a prospect and possible flops with the remaining picks.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 01:35 PM
Which wouldn't make any ****ing sense when they need a playmaker, and improvements on the OL.

What would make no sense would be passing up on one of the most highly anticipated QB's in the history of the draft and letting the #2 team on the board pick or trade him.

DJ's left nut
12-21-2011, 01:36 PM
That's if someone is willing to pay that much.

Someone is willing to pay that much.

If the Colts don't end up at #1 overall, they'll have to give up just as many picks as we would to get him. They'll just get the tiebreaker by virtue of sitting at #2 instead of #15.

The glory of that draft position is the bidding war as much as the prize, especially if you're a team like the Rams and you're after a bunch of lineman and WRs. There aren't any elite WRs in the draft this year (or relatively few) and lineman will be gettable in the 10 - 15 range. They have no reason at all to just trade back to 2 for a nominal return.

Fritz88
12-21-2011, 01:36 PM
I wouldn't go Ricky Williams for anyone. Its been shown that it doesn't work to give up the future for one player.

Raiders do it and it works......




...for them to continue failing

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:37 PM
What would make no sense would be passing up on one of the most highly anticipated QB's in the history of the draft and letting the #2 team on the board pick or trade him.

There's no point in drafting Luck. None. Bradford is and will be the franchise's QB for the long run.

They NEED to trade down even if they are in the top 3.

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 01:37 PM
What would make no sense would be passing up on one of the most highly anticipated QB's in the history of the draft and letting the #2 team on the board pick or trade him.

It would make no sense to have Bradford and Luck on your roster at the same time. Your trade value for either one would go down....and the cap hit you would take to trade either one of them would fuck you in the long run.

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 01:38 PM
Someone is willing to pay that much.

If the Colts don't end up at #1 overall, they'll have to give up just as many picks as we would to get him. They'll just get the tiebreaker by virtue of sitting at #2 instead of #15.

The glory of that draft position is the bidding war as much as the prize, especially if you're a team like the Rams and you're after a bunch of lineman and WRs. There aren't any elite WRs in the draft this year (or relatively few) and lineman will be gettable in the 10 - 15 range. They have no reason at all to just trade back to 2 for a nominal return.

So if you're sitting at #15.....would you trade 3 1st round picks for the #1 overall spot?

jd1020
12-21-2011, 01:39 PM
There's no point in drafting Luck. None. Bradford is and will be the franchise's QB for the long run.

They NEED to trade down even if they are in the top 3.

What about Bradford has shown you he's going to be a NFL franchise QB? He's sucked in the NFL. Stop going back on where he was drafted and start looking at his play on the field. I believe Tebow is the only QB in the league that is worse than Bradford right now.

Chiefaholic
12-21-2011, 01:40 PM
What the Colts will more than likely do is draft Luck, AND trade Manning for multiple draft picks to a desperate team to give Andrew more weapons. If I were Polian, I'd be on the phone every day talking trade options to desperate teams who don't put much stock into rookies. Washington comes to mind, and the Raiders would have been in the hunt had they not already trashed their next couple drafts.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:41 PM
What about Bradford has shown you he's going to be a NFL franchise QB? He's sucked in the NFL. Stop going back on where he was drafted and start looking at his play on the field. I believe Tebow is the only QB in the league that is worse than Bradford right now.

I'm going to defend Bradford until he stinks with a good team in front of him.

There isn't a good team in front of him. He has a mediocre-bad OL, terrible WRs.
Put almost any QB behind that line and he's dead.

Give Bradford a decent line, Blackmon and Amendola back, and we are in business.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 01:42 PM
I'm going to defend Bradford until he stinks with a good team in front of him.

There isn't a good team in front of him. He has a mediocre-bad OL, terrible WRs.
Put almost any QB behind that line and he's dead.

Give Bradford a decent line, Blackmon and Amendola back, and we are in business.

Peyton, Ben, and Rodgers all play behind shit OLines.

Why does a "franchise" QB all of a sudden need an all world team behind him when it's pretty much universal that the QB makes the offense?

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:42 PM
Look, didn't we post about this samething last week during the MNF game?

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 01:43 PM
What the Colts will more than likely do is draft Luck, AND trade Manning for multiple draft picks to a desperate team to give Andrew more weapons. If I were Polian, I'd be on the phone every day talking trade options to desperate teams who don't put much stock into rookies. Washington comes to mind, and the Raiders would have been in the hunt had they not already trashed their next couple drafts.

Manning is going to be released and free to sign with whatever team he wants. No one is taking on that contract and giving up draft picks for an old QB with neck problems.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:43 PM
Peyton, Ben, and Rodgers all play behind shit OLines.

Big Ben has Pouncey.
Peyton has Saturday.
Rodgers has Clifton, Bulaga, Sherrod.

Not to mention all 3 have a play maker.

DJ's left nut
12-21-2011, 01:43 PM
So if you're sitting at #15.....would you trade 3 1st round picks for the #1 overall spot?

This year - yes, probably.

Look at how many games this team won with a crap QB and injuries decimating us. Give this squad a legitimate stud quarterback and don't you think it's drafting in the mid-20's for the 2 other 1sts?

In fact, I think I'd give the 3 firsts without blinking. The prime years for some of our star players are shorter than you think. We desperately need to take advantage of this window right now.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 01:44 PM
Big Ben has Pouncey.
Peyton has Saturday.
Rodgers has Clifton, Bulaga, Sherrod.

Not to mention all 3 have a play maker.

All injured.

And then 1 out of 5 guys for the other 2? Give me a break.

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 01:44 PM
This year - yes, probably.

Look at how many games this team won with a crap QB and injuries decimating us. Give this squad a legitimate stud quarterback and don't you think it's drafting in the mid-20's for the 2 other 1sts?

In fact, I think I'd give the 3 firsts without blinking. The prime years for some of our star players are shorter than you think. We desperately need to take advantage of this window right now.

I'm all for it.

I just know it's not going to happen.

DJ's left nut
12-21-2011, 01:46 PM
It would make no sense to have Bradford and Luck on your roster at the same time. Your trade value for either one would go down....and the cap hit you would take to trade either one of them would fuck you in the long run.

Just Bradford.

They won't get bombed by trading Luck; in fact I think they could trade his rights without signing him. But either way, he's coming in under the reasonable scale.

That's what makes Bradford so difficult to move; they'll get bombed by the cap-hit. He's getting paid Brady money and he's only 2 years into the deal. They're pretty much stuck with Bradford (though that's a 'stuck' I'd gladly take). As such, the only choice they really have is dealing that pick or gutting their team for a season to make dealing Bradford doable.

The good news is that the team that trades for Bradford doesn't have to pay the signing bonus or absorb the hit, so he's extremely tradeable, they just need to clear the cap space to do it.

It's not relevant, the Colts aren't winning another game and their SOS is worse than the Rams right now anyway.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:47 PM
All injured.

And then 1 out of 5 guys for the other 2? Give me a break.

None of the starters for the Rams current OL are playing the position they played Opening Day.

All are either on IR, suck, or moved to another position due to injury.

DJ's left nut
12-21-2011, 01:47 PM
I'm all for it.

I just know it's not going to happen.

Not every organization in the NFL is run by guys that believe they invented the game and can find another Tom Brady whenever they need one in the 6th round.

Someone will absolutely give up 3 1sts for him if that option is out there.

Chiefaholic
12-21-2011, 01:47 PM
What about Bradford has shown you he's going to be a NFL franchise QB? He's sucked in the NFL. Stop going back on where he was drafted and start looking at his play on the field. I believe Tebow is the only QB in the league that is worse than Bradford right now.

Seriously? No way in hell do the Rams give up on Bradford already. They've invested too much into him financially to not give him the opportunity with more weapons to throw to and better pass protection. I have no doubt they'll debate different trade scenarios to trade down to pick up multiple picks in exchange. The Rams need loads of help, and Bradford is the least of their worries right now.

DJ's left nut
12-21-2011, 01:48 PM
All injured.

And then 1 out of 5 guys for the other 2? Give me a break.

And Sherrod sucks.

He can't be serious, can he?

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:49 PM
And Sherrod sucks.

He can't be serious, can he?

The worst starter on any of those lines would be better than any starter on the Rams OL, aside from maybe Dahl.

LiL stumppy
12-21-2011, 01:49 PM
All injured.

And then 1 out of 5 guys for the other 2? Give me a break.

What does that have to do with anything?

Dude, you're dumb. Bradford has shown flashes, he WILL be VERY good. I would bet money on it.

They have Steven Jackson, that's it. They have many holes to fill.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:50 PM
The Rams had a flukish record last season.

They were mediocre and the D was crazy good in the redzone.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 01:50 PM
What does that have to do with anything?

Dude, you're dumb. Bradford has shown flashes, he WILL be VERY good. I would bet money on it.

They have Steven Jackson, that's it. They have many holes to fill.

Cassel has shown flashes as well. So what's your point?

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 01:50 PM
Not every organization in the NFL is run by guys that believe they invented the game and can find another Tom Brady whenever they need one in the 6th round.

Someone will absolutely give up 3 1sts for him if that option is out there.

Well I meant that there was no chance that WE would do it.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:51 PM
Cassel has shown flashes as well. So what's your point?

Cassel's had more weapons to work with. Bradford hasn't had those tools to work with.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 01:52 PM
Cassel's had more weapons to work with. Bradford hasn't.

Bradford needs the team to pick his game up. Sounds like a hugely overpaid game manager to me.

I don't care how bad your receivers are. When you are barely throwing for 50% completions, you are fucking bad.

LiL stumppy
12-21-2011, 01:53 PM
Cassel has shown flashes as well. So what's your point?

Cassel lierally had about 3 good games in 3 seasons where he actually stepped up into the pocket and looked like an NFL QB. Bradford is already past that.

I hope your not basing Cassel's (padded) stats as him showing flashes?

He has never been good, he never had hope, except for a 3 game stretch last season.

Our OL this year, is better than Bradford's, along with our skill positions, even with JC out. They are horrible, they have nothing.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:53 PM
Bradford needs the team to pick his game up. Sounds like a hugely overpaid game manager to me.

Bradford needs an OL that isn't among the worst in the league as well as another play maker at WR before a judgement can be made.

Chiefaholic
12-21-2011, 01:53 PM
Manning is going to be released and free to sign with whatever team he wants. No one is taking on that contract and giving up draft picks for an old QB with neck problems.

You severely underestimate the stupidity of the Daniel Snyder type GM's of the league. Like crazy 'ol Al, he gets a heart on for people that USED to be playmakers well beyond their prime. I'de be extremely suprised if Indi doesn't get some pretty respectable draft compensation in exchange for Manning.

ChiefsCountry
12-21-2011, 01:55 PM
I would give up our second round pick in a heart beat to get Bradford. Hell I would very strongly consider our first for him.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 01:56 PM
I would give up our second round pick in a heart beat to get Bradford. Hell I would very strongly consider our first for him.

You aren't getting Bradford for just a 2nd.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 01:56 PM
I would give up our second round pick in a heart beat to get Bradford. Hell I would very strongly consider our first for him.

WTF?

ChiefsCountry
12-21-2011, 01:59 PM
WTF?

Bradford or Riley Rieff/Peter Konz/David DeCastro. Thats a no brainer to me.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:00 PM
Bradford or Riley Rieff/Peter Konz/David DeCastro. Thats a no brainer to me.

Why would anyone give up their 1st for a QB with career numbers of 57.6% and <6 YPA?

EDIT: Forgot to add his 24:33 TD:TO ratio.

Chiefaholic
12-21-2011, 02:04 PM
Why would anyone give up their 1st for a QB with career numbers of 57.6% and <6 YPA?

EDIT: Forgot to add his 24:33 TD:TO ratio.

EDIT : Forget to add he has ZERO pass protection and one of the worst receiving core in the league. Not to mention a well beyond his prime HB who is the only offensive weapon on the team above mediocre.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-21-2011, 02:05 PM
Or they could be stuck with 2 QBs and not upgrading their otherwise awful roster. Once they draft Luck either his or Bradford's (or both) trade value decreases. The 1st pick is worth more prior to the selection.

See: Manning, Eli.

False.

DaKCMan AP
12-21-2011, 02:06 PM
See: Manning, Eli.

False.

That's a different scenario. The Rams wouldn't be trading Luck/Bradford for another QB.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:07 PM
That's a different scenario. The Rams wouldn't be trading Luck/Bradford for another QB.

Wouldn't that mean they would be getting an even bigger haul? After all, the QB is the most important position on the team.

ChiefsCountry
12-21-2011, 02:08 PM
Why would anyone give up their 1st for a QB with career numbers of 57.6% and <6 YPA?

EDIT: Forgot to add his 24:33 TD:TO ratio.

Your hatred of him and St. Louis are comical.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:09 PM
Your hatred of him and St. Louis are comical.

No hatred. Truth. He hasn't done shit in the NFL and people want to believe hes a franchise QB just because he was drafted #1. I don't see people clamoring for Carr, and he was in a similar situation.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-21-2011, 02:10 PM
That's a different scenario. The Rams wouldn't be trading Luck/Bradford for another QB.

No, it's not.

The first pick, post acquisition, was turned into the fifth pick, another first, two thirds, and a fifth, IIRC, with a guy who stated he didn't want to play in the city that took him.

You don't think hamstrung SD's expected value a bit?

BigMeatballDave
12-21-2011, 02:11 PM
That seems excessive.

DaKCMan AP
12-21-2011, 02:11 PM
Wouldn't that mean they would be getting an even bigger haul? After all, the QB is the most important position on the team.

No, because they have less leverage 1) when they make the selection and 2) when they have 2 QBs on the roster with one of them having a very undesirable contract.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:12 PM
No, because they have less leverage 1) when they make the selection and 2) when they have 2 QBs on the roster with one of them having a very undesirable contract.

Ya. SD really had all the leverage. They had a guy who wouldn't sign with their team.

ChiefsCountry
12-21-2011, 02:13 PM
No hatred. Truth. He hasn't done shit in the NFL and people want to believe hes a franchise QB just because he was drafted #1. I don't see people clamoring for Carr, and he was in a similar situation.

Bradford is in his second year douche and has been hurt this year. He put up decent stats for a rookie with a WR core that couldn't cut in the UFL. You put him in Kansas City with our WRs, Jamaal Charles and hell our line - you would see a totally different QB.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:14 PM
Bradford is in his second year douche and has been hurt this year. He put up decent stats for a rookie with a WR core that couldn't cut in the UFL. You put him in Kansas City with our WRs, Jamaal Charles and hell our line - you would see a totally different QB.

Decent stats while throwing for <6 YPA.

Carr's second year: 12 295 167 56.6 2013 6.8 9 13 69.5
Bradford's second year: 10 191 357 53.5 2,164 6.06 6 6 70.5

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-21-2011, 02:15 PM
Sam Bradford can be a good QB, but only if your team runs the WCO.

Brock
12-21-2011, 02:17 PM
Bradford is in his second year douche and has been hurt this year. He put up decent stats for a rookie with a WR core that couldn't cut in the UFL. You put him in Kansas City with our WRs, Jamaal Charles and hell our line - you would see a totally different QB.

I tend to agree with that.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:20 PM
I tend to agree with that.

Every QB can be better with superior talent around them. Franchise QB's elevate their team's lack of talent and, most importantly, win games.

ChiefsCountry
12-21-2011, 02:20 PM
Decent stats while throwing for <6 YPA.

With shitty receivers in St. Louis. He could easily average 7 to 8 here in Kansas City.

Chiefs Pantalones
12-21-2011, 02:21 PM
I prefer Luck over Bradford. Just me though

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:22 PM
With shitty receivers in St. Louis. He could easily average 7 to 8 here in Kansas City.

And you can say that how?

ChiefsCountry
12-21-2011, 02:24 PM
And you can say that how?

Bowe, Baldwin, Breaston > Lloyd, Ammendoa, Alexander

Brock
12-21-2011, 02:25 PM
Every QB can be better with superior talent around them. Franchise QB's elevate their team's lack of talent and, most importantly, win games.

It's kind of early to say that he can't do that. Do I think he's as good as Luck or Newton? No. But I do still think he can be great.

Detoxing
12-21-2011, 02:26 PM
Every QB can be better with superior talent around them. Franchise QB's elevate their team's lack of talent and, most importantly, win games.

He's in his second freaking year and the guy has been in and out of the lineup all damn season.

When ever you start talking QB's and the draft, you go full retard, you really do.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:27 PM
He's in his second freaking year and the guy has been in and out of the lineup all damn season.

When ever you start talking QB's and the draft, you go full retard, you really do.

Actually, I go full reality.

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 02:27 PM
He's in his second freaking year and the guy has been in and out of the lineup all damn season.

When ever you start talking QB's and the draft, you go full retard, you really do.

This.

Detoxing
12-21-2011, 02:29 PM
Actually, I go full reality.

No the fuck you don't.

We've been down this road already. I click on the thread, and sure enough, you're here spouting the same shit that you've said before.

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 02:30 PM
Well....this is the douche that wants Landry fucking Jones.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:30 PM
No the **** you don't.

We've been down this road already. I click on the thread, and sure enough, you're here spouting the same shit that you've said before.

Rams are a terrible TEAM and Bradford is a part of that terrible. I'm sorry people choose to ignore that.

He's been one of the worst QBs in the league, even in his so called "solid" rookie season.

Detoxing
12-21-2011, 02:32 PM
Rams are a terrible TEAM and Bradford is a part of that terrible. I'm sorry people choose to ignore that.

if you can't see that Bradford hasn't been healthy all freaking season and has NOTHING outside of Steven Jackson, then I'm sorry, you've gone full retard. The Rams don't even have the WR's that they started the season with, FFS.

ChiefsCountry
12-21-2011, 02:32 PM
Here is Bradford and Aikman's first two year stats.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:34 PM
if you can't see that Bradford hasn't been healthy all freaking season and has NOTHING outside of Steven Jackson, then I'm sorry, you've gone full retard. The Rams don't even have the WR's that they started the season with, FFS.

He's been bad ever since he entered the league. If you wan't to talk about his "solid" rookie season then you are as blind as the people praising Cassel for last season.

Dexter Manley
12-21-2011, 02:34 PM
The pick's worth depends on the actual player involved.

Luck is a very good prospect, but doesn't have elite arm strength or agility.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:35 PM
Here is Bradford and Aikman's first two year stats.

Seals it. Bradford is going to be a 3x SB winner and a HOFer.

Detoxing
12-21-2011, 02:35 PM
He's been bad ever since he entered the league. If you wan't to talk about his "solid" rookie season then you are as blind as the people praising Cassel for last season.

Are you kidding me? Bad since he entered the league? :facepalm:

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:36 PM
Are you kidding me? Bad since he entered the league? :facepalm:

Ya. 18:15 TD:INT ratio with 5.9 YPA. He was fucking amazing last year!

Detoxing
12-21-2011, 02:37 PM
So basically JD, your stance is that if a Rookie Qb doesn't come in right away and set the NFL on fire, then he's no good, amirite?

jd1020
12-21-2011, 02:38 PM
So basically JD, your stance is that if a Rookie Qb doesn't come in right away and set the NFL on fire, then he's no good, amirite?

Bradford hasn't even lit a spark yet, let alone start a fire.

Chiefnj2
12-21-2011, 02:38 PM
Bradford has been brutal this year.

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 02:39 PM
1. Injured.
2. New OC.

Detoxing
12-21-2011, 02:41 PM
1. Injured.
2. New OC.

3.Greg Lloyd taken in the middle of the season
4. Mike-Sims Walker
5. Ravaged O-Line
6. " " -fense


I mean, fuck, the list goes on and on.

Chocolate Hog
12-21-2011, 02:47 PM
I like how ya'll say it doesn't matter because he's been injured this year. He missed most of his Senior year too. Theres durability questions among other things I'd much rather trade up for Griffin/Barkley.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 02:59 PM
I like how ya'll say it doesn't matter because he's been injured this year. He missed most of his Senior year too. Theres durability questions among other things I'd much rather trade up for Griffin/Barkley.

His shoulder hasn't been an issue this season. It's his ankle.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 03:00 PM
3.Greg Lloyd taken in the middle of the season
4. Mike-Sims Walker
5. Ravaged O-Line
6. " " -fense


I mean, ****, the list goes on and on.

Defense hasn't been that bad, even with 10 CBs on IR.

Chiefnj2
12-21-2011, 03:01 PM
Bradford's saving grace is that his backup (feeley??) is struggling just as much, if not more, than he is. So, it's not obviously all on Bradford.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 03:01 PM
Bradford's saving grace is that his backup (feeley??) is struggling just as much, if not more, than he is. So, it's not obviously all on Bradford.

Then you have dumb fucks bitching about how good Clemens was vs the Bengals when he has been with the team for barely a week. :facepalm:

Bump
12-21-2011, 03:17 PM
whats up with Sam Bradford? I haven't watched him play once this year, but is he bad now? he looked promising last year. Would be interesting if the Rams got Luck and traded Bradford to someone else, but I doubt it.

The Bad Guy
12-21-2011, 03:32 PM
The Rams aren't trading Sam Bradford.

jd1020
12-21-2011, 03:33 PM
The Rams aren't trading Sam Bradford.

They aren't getting the 1st pick either.

Don't they lose the tiebreakers? They need Indy to win out AND the Vikings to win 1.

Rams Fan
12-21-2011, 03:36 PM
They aren't getting the 1st pick either.

Don't they lose the tiebreakers? They need Indy to win out AND the Vikings to win 1.

Pretty much.

O.city
12-21-2011, 03:53 PM
Say the vikes grt the first pick would they trade it or just take Luck. Gotta say Im not opposed to trading up but thats alot of picks.it could be argued that Luck would be more valuable than whoever you get with the picks you give up tho.


I would rather trade up for Barkley or rgIII but either way os fine with me

FringeNC
12-21-2011, 03:57 PM
The Rams aren't trading Sam Bradford.

If you get the first pick, how do you not trade Sam Bradford? Luck is a better prospect, and will be cheaper than Bradford, given the new CBA. Trade him to Cleveland for their first and reunite him with Shurmur.

O.city
12-21-2011, 04:01 PM
IMO if it were three years ago id say draft RGIII and let him develop with the talent. If you get the three back healthy,with some depth and a few pieces this team is talented to have about a 4 year window. We need the most NFL prepared guy that can come in and get up to speed quick.


IMO its luck or barkley

Johnny Vegas
12-21-2011, 04:08 PM
Not sure if its been said yet....If its going to cost that much you can wheel n deal with other teams 1st rounds losing either players+picks. We had 2 with Doresy and Albert. Thus obtaining 1-2 more 1st rounds from other teams you can trade those picks or keep em. It's manageable, but a shot in the dark.

Dicky McElephant
12-21-2011, 04:09 PM
Not sure if its been said yet....If its going to cost that much you can wheel n deal with other teams 1st rounds losing either players+picks. We had 2 with Doresy and Albert. Thus obtaining 1-2 more 1st rounds from other teams you can trade those picks or keep em. It's manageable, but a shot in the dark.

Good luck getting a 1st round pick for Dorsey OR Albert.

mylittlepony
12-29-2011, 06:03 AM
What about Dbowe, 1st & 2nd this year aswell as 1st & a conditional 2nd-4th next? Fills one of the biggest needs for them with a proven comodity and gives them some extra picks this and next year. KC can resign Carr and has a franchise QB.

Pasta Giant Meatball
12-29-2011, 07:59 AM
What about Dbowe, 1st & 2nd this year aswell as 1st & a conditional 2nd-4th next? Fills one of the biggest needs for them with a proven comodity and gives them some extra picks this and next year. KC can resign Carr and has a franchise QB.

:LOL: Brandon Marshall was traded for 2-2nds BTW. Bowe would not bring back 2 1sts and 2 2nds. Bevis was right....crack was given for Christmas

Hydrae
12-29-2011, 08:49 AM
Good luck getting a 1st round pick for Dorsey OR Albert.

I believe he is saying we had 2 #1 picks that year.

Chiefaholic
12-29-2011, 08:50 AM
:LOL: Brandon Marshall was traded for 2-2nds BTW. Bowe would not bring back 2 1sts and 2 2nds. Bevis was right....crack was given for Christmas


Brandon Marshall didn't set the bar for max compensation on a WR. The two seconds was due to him being a headcase in training camp, and the Donks cutting their losses before the compensation was even less.

Now, I'm not saying we'de get multiple first and second picks. But, Bowe's worth at least one first and one second rounder IMO. I'de much rather keep Bowe, but if trading him means we land Luck, then pull the trigger before the ink dried on the contract proposal.

mylittlepony
12-29-2011, 08:56 AM
:LOL: Brandon Marshall was traded for 2-2nds BTW. Bowe would not bring back 2 1sts and 2 2nds. Bevis was right....crack was given for Christmas

:grr: I ment more like:

Dbowe + 9th pick 2012 + 41 pick 2012 + 1st round chiefs pick 2013 + 2-4th round chiefs pick 2013 = rough worth of 1st pick St.Louis 2012 (Luck).

Then STL get bowe for the price of a first rounder seeing he is a need for them and not a headcase like Marshall. Making the trade have the worth of 3 1st and 2 second.

Pasta Giant Meatball
12-29-2011, 09:00 AM
:grr: I ment more like:

Dbowe + 9th pick 2012 + 41 pick 2012 + 1st round chiefs pick 2013 + 2-4th round chiefs pick 2013 = rough worth of 1st pick St.Louis 2012 (Luck).

Then STL get bowe for the price of a first rounder seeing he is a need for them and not a headcase like Marshall. Making the trade have the worth of 3 1st and 2 second.

:facepalm: On my part. Looks like I had crack for Christmas.

The Bad Guy
12-29-2011, 09:07 AM
If you get the first pick, how do you not trade Sam Bradford? Luck is a better prospect, and will be cheaper than Bradford, given the new CBA. Trade him to Cleveland for their first and reunite him with Shurmur.

Because his contract is not something teams are going to shell out draft picks to take on.

If he had the new rookie scale deal, then yes, Bradford would be on the first bus out, but between the hit the Rams take, and the financial obligation to the new team, it's not even worth it.

BossChief
12-29-2011, 04:49 PM
Because his contract is not something teams are going to shell out draft picks to take on.

If he had the new rookie scale deal, then yes, Bradford would be on the first bus out, but between the hit the Rams take, and the financial obligation to the new team, it's not even worth it.what are you talking about?

His contract is cheap as fuck from here on out.

He has 4 years left and his highest paid year is the last, at a whopping 3.7 million.

Most of the big money of his deal was front loaded.

He can still make a lot of money in the last 4 years, but it is almost all performance and achievement based.

If we can't get Luck or RG3, trading for Bradford would be an excellent move.

Brock
12-29-2011, 05:37 PM
Looks like his bonuses have all been paid. I'm not sure there are cap reasons that a team can't trade for him.

ChiefsCountry
12-29-2011, 05:45 PM
Rams fans think its a 14.3 million dollar hit on their salary cap this year. Who knows, we got the money to absorb his contract thats for sure. Especially if you get Cassel and Orton's off the books.

Rams Fan
12-29-2011, 06:07 PM
This talk is all hog wash if they get the 2nd overall pick.

And no, they just aren't going to trade Bradford unless Kroenke cleans house. Even then, it all depends on what the new GM would think about Bradford.

Rams Fan
12-29-2011, 06:22 PM
Rams fans think its a 14.3 million dollar hit on their salary cap this year. Who knows, we got the money to absorb his contract thats for sure. Especially if you get Cassel and Orton's off the books.

As for the salary cap, a Bradford trade on or before June 1 would mean a $14.4 million dead-money cap charge for the Rams. If he was traded after June 1, the hit would be $3.6 million in 2012 and $10.8 million in 2013.


http://101sports.com/category/hbalzer-blogs/20111228/Stop-the-Crazy-Trade-Bradford-Talk/

R8RFAN
12-29-2011, 06:34 PM
Raiders do it and it works......




...for them to continue failing

Chiefs don't and haven't been to a Superbowl in 40 years and hasn't won a playoff game since Clinton was in office

bigbucks24
12-29-2011, 06:36 PM
What the Colts will more than likely do is draft Luck, AND trade Manning for multiple draft picks to a desperate team to give Andrew more weapons. If I were Polian, I'd be on the phone every day talking trade options to desperate teams who don't put much stock into rookies. Washington comes to mind, and the Raiders would have been in the hunt had they not already trashed their next couple drafts.

The Colts are going to trade Manning after they pay him the $28MM bonus?

whoman69
12-29-2011, 07:05 PM
The Colts are going to trade Manning after they pay him the $28MM bonus?

Don't see it. They may have to cut him or get another deal.

notorious
12-29-2011, 07:23 PM
Chiefs don't and haven't been to a Superbowl in 40 years and hasn't won a playoff game since Clinton was in office

Your point?

R8RFAN
12-29-2011, 07:28 PM
Your point?

Adding to Fritz88's analyses